The USA has many enemies like the powerful Russia and the recent ascendant China. The dispute between West and East is more real than ever and the Cold War with its arms race never ended. This race is alive as a tiger's eye. Europe's biggest alliance is crumbling with cultural degradation and Islamic expansion. We do not know if in the future the European Union will have the same military force as today. While the West is sustained by the unshakeable American resistance, the East expands economically and militarily. In a third world war the scene of America would be complex from the numerical point of view. North Korea, Iran, China and Russia form a brutal warfare against the West. If the United States cut off trade relations with China this may delay China's economic and military advance. But the United States would also suffer side effects from that decision. On the other hand if the United States continues to outsource its workforce to China it will enrich the pockets of the Chinese Communist Party. If a third world war happens the costs and human losses to america will be catastrophic and we do not know exactly if it is able to win this war. Please Give your opinions on the subject mentioned.
I think we will be fine. We are still number one in terms of military might and after China and Russia, most of the top spots are taken by our allies. The thing about the U.S. is that by ourselves were are still the ultimate superpower of the world, but if you add in our allies then it creates an alliance to the scale that the world has never seen before.
Considering that the US, is the worlds biggest military power by a longshot, and a good chunk of the other top military powers are their allies. It is extremely high.
North Korea, depends on intimidation, not outright invasion. Their tech is far too primitive to be able to wage war across such a distance, not to mention, the severe starvation their troops have. Iran is far more intrested in dealing with its Sunni neighbours, than it is with the US China's economy depends on the US. Going to war would make little fiscial sense Russia, is perhaps the biggest threat, but even there, the cost of a war with the US would be so astronomically huge, there would bel ittle reason to do it.
All in all, stop being paranoid, and europe is doing fine too.
Considering that the US, is the worlds biggest military power by a longshot, and a good chunk of the other top military powers are their allies. It is extremely high.
North Korea, depends on intimidation, not outright invasion. Their tech is far too primitive to be able to wage war across such a distance, not to mention, the severe starvation their troops have.
Iran is far more intrested in dealing with its Sunni neighbours, than it is with the US
China's economy depends on the US. Going to war would make little fiscial sense
Russia, is perhaps the biggest threat, but even there, the cost of a war with the US would be so astronomically huge, there would bel ittle reason to do it.
All in all, stop being paranoid, and europe is doing fine too.
Considering that the US, is the worlds biggest military power by a longshot, and a good chunk of the other top military powers are their allies. It is extremely high.
North Korea, depends on intimidation, not outright invasion. Their tech is far too primitive to be able to wage war across such a distance, not to mention, the severe starvation their troops have.
Iran is far more intrested in dealing with its Sunni neighbours, than it is with the US
China's economy depends on the US. Going to war would make little fiscial sense
Russia, is perhaps the biggest threat, but even there, the cost of a war with the US would be so astronomically huge, there would bel ittle reason to do it.
All in all, stop being paranoid, and europe is doing fine too.
I hope China will never become the greatest economic and military power on the planet. If this happens I would be worried about the balance of global powers. I do not want communism to become a socio-economic and philosophical reference for any nation.
what would be the point of a military confrontation?
i doubt either side would be willing to start an all out war over "they don't think like us"
there would need to be tangible ( economic ) benefit and currently it's more economically beneficial for countries like china and the us to trade w/ each other as opposed to kill each other.
what would be the point of a military confrontation?
i doubt either side would be willing to start an all out war over "they don't think like us"
there would need to be tangible ( economic ) benefit and currently it's more economically beneficial for countries like china and the us to trade w/ each other as opposed to kill each other.
Well, maybe not even Iran with nuclear arsenal would be able to start a war against the West. They know that Israel would shred and the whole European Union as well. Warring over the South China Sea in search of oil would generate more dumps than the final profit that China could get all the oil in a supposed victory. China would not run the risk of losing a war or spending an insanity to win in return for little return. And the situation in the Middle East will remain the same. Conventional wars of small prowess for all eternity. Nothing more than that.
I think the fear of global threats is more harmful than the threats themselves. Remember when anthrax was a big deal? People went out and bought respirators (that wouldn't work), taped up their windows (also, would not work), and bought cheaply made HAZMAT suits (also, would not work...for long). Anthrax is serious but to disperse it and actually do some critical damage? Meh.
I mean let's just say for example that some organization, country, or rogue state took out New York and San Francisco and Washington DC with dirty bombs or even missile attacks (nuclear). OK? Yeah it's a tragedy but all you've done is given the US permission to seriously **** your shit up, and that is exactly what they will do. Moreover, the US (despite current affairs) is still politically and economically intertwined with so many countries out there that you've called the Western world to arms.
I mean I know it was a while ago for most of you, and a lot of you were not even adults when it happened, but do you remember the climate right after 9/11? I don't mean fake invasions after 9/11, I mean the first few weeks after 9/11. The world was at the side of the US, ready to help it out. NATO invoked article 5 (for the first time ever) to assist one of it's members. When we first went into Iraq and Afghanistan, we had support and good will...which the US soon ruined, but still! At the beginning.
So if the US is legitimately threatened, well...watch out.
The only thing that really worries me are hackers, and maybe a couple serious biological/chemical things.
The USA has many enemies like the powerful Russia and the recent ascendant China. The dispute between West and East is more real than ever and the Cold War with its arms race never ended. This race is alive as a tiger's eye. Europe's biggest alliance is crumbling with cultural degradation and Islamic expansion. We do not know if in the future the European Union will have the same military force as today. While the West is sustained by the unshakeable American resistance, the East expands economically and militarily. In a third world war the scene of America would be complex from the numerical point of view. North Korea, Iran, China and Russia form a brutal warfare against the West. If the United States cut off trade relations with China this may delay China's economic and military advance. But the United States would also suffer side effects from that decision. On the other hand if the United States continues to outsource its workforce to China it will enrich the pockets of the Chinese Communist Party. If a third world war happens the costs and human losses to america will be catastrophic and we do not know exactly if it is able to win this war. Please Give your opinions on the subject mentioned.
Do you honestly believe this, or was that just for dramatic effect?
The USA has many enemies like the powerful Russia and the recent ascendant China. The dispute between West and East is more real than ever and the Cold War with its arms race never ended. This race is alive as a tiger's eye. Europe's biggest alliance is crumbling with cultural degradation and Islamic expansion. We do not know if in the future the European Union will have the same military force as today. While the West is sustained by the unshakeable American resistance, the East expands economically and militarily. In a third world war the scene of America would be complex from the numerical point of view. North Korea, Iran, China and Russia form a brutal warfare against the West. If the United States cut off trade relations with China this may delay China's economic and military advance. But the United States would also suffer side effects from that decision. On the other hand if the United States continues to outsource its workforce to China it will enrich the pockets of the Chinese Communist Party. If a third world war happens the costs and human losses to america will be catastrophic and we do not know exactly if it is able to win this war. Please Give your opinions on the subject mentioned.
Do you honestly believe this, or was that just for dramatic effect?
Any bad influence that a nation receives can have catastrophic consequences in the future. What sustains Europe today is basically secular culture. Europe is not a monumental agricultural and industrial power like the United States. The poor management of European countries can lead to disaster. And this is closely linked to cultural factors and Islamic expansion and unbridled immigration are a problem that England, Germany and France must solve. All these problems that Europe has faced are premeditated by enemy countries such as Russia and Iran.
Do not you believe that social factors can compromise a nation's success in other sectors? So take a look at the United States led by Obama. Trump is cleaning up all the mess he's made and recovering the American economy. He was able to negotiate recently with North Korea and finally made Jerusalem the capital of Israel.
Want more examples? Look at the situation of public safety in France and England. Nowadays there are already French neighborhoods where the citizens of that country can not walk freely without being vandalized by Islamic radicals. Look at the cultural degradation in the South American countries like Brazil, Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela.
All this degradation influences the economy and soon after begins to influence all other sectors of a country. And the military is one of them. A militarily weakened Europe would be a risk to the whole world.
The USA has many enemies like the powerful Russia and the recent ascendant China. The dispute between West and East is more real than ever and the Cold War with its arms race never ended. This race is alive as a tiger's eye. Europe's biggest alliance is crumbling with cultural degradation and Islamic expansion. We do not know if in the future the European Union will have the same military force as today. While the West is sustained by the unshakeable American resistance, the East expands economically and militarily. In a third world war the scene of America would be complex from the numerical point of view. North Korea, Iran, China and Russia form a brutal warfare against the West. If the United States cut off trade relations with China this may delay China's economic and military advance. But the United States would also suffer side effects from that decision. On the other hand if the United States continues to outsource its workforce to China it will enrich the pockets of the Chinese Communist Party. If a third world war happens the costs and human losses to america will be catastrophic and we do not know exactly if it is able to win this war. Please Give your opinions on the subject mentioned.
Do you honestly believe this, or was that just for dramatic effect?
Any bad influence that a nation receives can have catastrophic consequences in the future. What sustains Europe today is basically secular culture. Europe is not a monumental agricultural and industrial power like the United States. The poor management of European countries can lead to disaster. And this is closely linked to cultural factors and Islamic expansion and unbridled immigration are a problem that England, Germany and France must solve. All these problems that Europe has faced are premeditated by enemy countries such as Russia and Iran.
Do not you believe that social factors can compromise a nation's success in other sectors? So take a look at the United States led by Obama. Trump is cleaning up all the mess he's made and recovering the American economy. He was able to negotiate recently with North Korea and finally made Jerusalem the capital of Israel.
Want more examples? Look at the situation of public safety in France and England. Nowadays there are already French neighborhoods where the citizens of that country can not walk freely without being vandalized by Islamic radicals. Look at the cultural degradation in the South American countries like Brazil, Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela.
All this degradation influences the economy and soon after begins to influence all other sectors of a country. And the military is one of them. A militarily weakened Europe would be a risk to the whole world.
Of course, nations should always strive to address and resolve any societal, economic or national security issues facing them, so that they can enjoy a peaceful and prosperous future. However, your claim that Europe is currently crumbling from within, and facing cultural degradation from perceived Islamic expansionism, is in my opinion a very sensationalist and inaccurate statement to make. Now I am not denying that handling immigration, as well the flow of refugees into Europe, is indeed today one of the biggest challenges faced by the EU. Also I agree that it has led to many cultural tensions within European countries, as is often the case when attempting to integrate first-generation immigrants into societies. You have to realise though that when language such as 'invasion of Islam' (I refer to right-wing media here, not you) gets thrown around, it often has little connection to reality, primarily because those behind such headlines have divisive agendas they want to push.
I'll give you an example of this. Currently there's been a lot of talk by right-wing commentators about the influx of muslims into Italy, from North Africa and the Middle East, and how this threatens Europe's 'Judeo-Christian values' right? Actually, when looking at the religion of the foreign population within Italy, muslims account for 32%. On the other hand, christians constitute 53% of the foreign community, giving you about 1.7 christian immigrants for every muslim one. Not only that, but these percentages broadly match those of 1993 (this data is from 2014/15), in which 32% of foreign citizens identified as muslim, while 55% were christian. Also, as of 2016 the overall Italian muslim population was 2.6%, while the total foreign community sat at 8.4%. So basically, over a 20 year period the proportions have hardly changed at all, despite the myth that muslims have in recent years been drastically changing the religious dynamic of Italy. It's hardly surprising though, the extreme right often use religion or culture as a smokescreen for what are really racial objections to immigration. If you want to read about this in more depth, then here's a link:
Rather than focussing on sinister conspiracy theories such as the existence of a coordinated effort to islamise Europe, by desperate migrants fleeing war and dire economic circumstances, we should instead look towards solving the root causes of the current European migrant crisis. More specifically, I am referring to urgently seeking an end to conflicts in Libya, Syria, Yemen and overcoming ISIS throughout the Middle East. As you mentioned, countries such as Russia and Iran (among others) exacerbate these situations, and so in that regard they are enemies to the European people, as well as those who flee the slaughter. Additionally, we should be seeking to engage on a greater level economically, as well as offering assistance to help address the various issues facing the countries which these migrants come from. If there is a better standard of living, as well as basic security in place, then I truly believe that the majority of migrants would not feel the need to risk their lives crossing the Mediterranean.
Europe is always going to bear the brunt of any movement of people from Africa and the Middle East, simply due to geographic proximity. It can't rely on other continents to solve these problems, and many countries probably don't care anyway as it doesn't affect them directly. In my opinion, it is more responsible and effective to take the globalist approach and tackle these issues head on, rather than allow ourselves to be divided by them, retreating back to petty nationalism, and hoping that the migrant crisis will just solve itself or go away. I know I am waffling a bit now, but this is how I feel European countries should manage the current situation, and avert any potential disaster which you alluded to.
I agree entirely with your point that social factors can impact a country's overall harmony, as well as it's progress in numerous national aspects. Now I don't want to bash on Trump here unduly, as this forum already has that covered, and you know your own country far better than I ever could. So yeah, I will take your word for it lol. Honestly I hope that the economy over there does continue to do well, and all Americans are able benefit from it. We shall see how things go, it's always nice to remain optimistic I say. On the North Korea situation, it is good to see that things appear to be heading in a more positive direction. Hopefully Trump follows through on the plan to meet with Kim Jong-Un, and they can attempt to hash things out diplomatically. Now the only thing I'd dispute here is that he hasn't made Jerusalem the capital of Israel, he has however made Jerusalem the location for the U.S. embassy. To actually resolve the dispute regarding Jerusalem's status for both the Israelis and Palestinians will take nothing short of a miracle at this point.
Okay now to the actual question of cultural degradation. You are absolutely correct that one of the foundational pillars of the EU as an organisation, is secular governance. The thing is though that freedom of religion is itself a fundamental right for all, within the EU. Furthermore, the presence of muslims in no way threatens secularism, just as it isn't at all affected by the many christians, jews, sikhs or hindus living here. Europe has had muslims living here for hundreds of years now, and despite what Breitbart or the Daily Mail says, muslims do generally integrate as well as any other immigrant group. Of course, the second and third generations will naturally have an easier time with this than their parents or grandparents though. Here's a good article on precisely this point:
Now does Europe face a worrying upwards trend of Islamic extremism? Undoubtedly, along with the refugee crisis, it is among the most critical threats to the security and stability of the EU. So yeah, tackling the radicalisation of young muslims, as well as arresting jihadists returning or infiltrating from abroad should be treated with the highest priority. Following on from my point earlier, dealing with these issues at their sources, and resolving conflicts abroad is equally as important as taking anti-terrorism precautions within Europe, and ensuring the safety and well being of the people in all European nations. Let me be clear though, hate crimes and right-wing terrorism is also on the rise (particularly here in the UK, I can give you info on that if you wish), so that is also a problem which we must resolve.
In terms of the supposed no-go zones and neighbourhoods throughout Europe, that is largely bullshit pedalled by scumbags such as Katie Hopkins, Lauren Southern, Tommy Robinson, Anne Marie Waters etc, using fear mongering and dog-whistle politics to divide society, and shamefully further their own publicity/'careers'. There are indeed areas of many cities which I would not want to venture into at night, but that applies to places with and without any muslim or even immigrant inhabitants. More often than not, the neighbourhoods you'd want to avoid walking through are so dangerous because of poverty and in turn a higher than average level of crime, rather than simply the religion and culture of the people living there. Hell this guy walked through and documented Bury Park, a neighbourhood in Luton, UK with a large muslim community. This is meant to be one of the often mentioned no-go zones here, and he did it during the night:
Here's somebody else doing a little walking adventure through the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, another sharia law no-go zone. He lived to tell the tale too:
Basically the point I'm trying to make here is that there are good and bad neighbourhoods all over Europe, be it in the UK, France, Germany and so on. Now I'm not disputing that there are many examples of areas with a predominant culture living within them, and this goes to show that integration is not 100% perfect over here. However I don't think it's fair to say this is unique to Europe. You no doubt have asian enclaves of cities such as Chinatowns, and hispanic areas over in America too I imagine. Typically in the case of first generation immigrants, people stick together for support and to have a social life while they are still perfecting the language, or seeking work. Sometimes this continues throughout later generations, and cultural communities are formed. It's not ideal in terms of integration, but it is what it is. The problem is that these neighbourhoods end up being easy targets for people with discriminatory agendas. For example, if a crime is committed by one of the residents then you frequently have a guilt by association scenario play out.
Right, now I'm going to admit up front that I'm not too knowledgeable on the situations in those countries you've mentioned lol. I have heard there are tough times currently in Venezuela and Cuba, and no doubt there are certain levels of cultural degradation going on over there, probably heavily economically related. But yeah, Latin America I don't feel confident enough to challenge any of your claims. Sorry, I'd have to do some reading on the situation first d'oh.
Degradation of society can be bad for economic efficiency and growth yup. Regarding the military, and military spending, I'd view that as a whole other debate in itself. From a European perspective, you'd have to rationally evaluate what potential threats we realistically face, and perhaps adapt the way in which the current defence budgets are utilised. I mean you may say Russia? They have a GDP of about $1.4 trillion, compared to the EU's collective $17 trillion. Even with them pouring money into their military, to the detriment of their other national programmes, they couldn't hope to match combined EU defence spending, even at low rates. They are certainly not the Soviet Union of the past, and anyway the Cold War is over now.
Rather, I believe that the concept of large scale warfare should be left in the 20th century, and we should be concentrating on using our money for humanitarian relief, and peacekeeping efforts to quell the current localised conflicts around the world instead. Now obviously the military doctrine of the last few decades needs to be reformed anyway, with the rise in global terrorism, espionage and hacking attacks etc.
@littleangrydog: Wow, apologies for the long winded response. I didn't mean to bury you under a mountain of text amigo. I'm just pretty rubbish at putting my points across concisely, and obviously went a bit OTT there. Still though, if there's any bits you strongly disagree with, would be interesting to hear your take on things. Hopefully not too tedious to read anyway!
@mandzilla: Long and well thought out post, I am european and while I do think our country takes in too many refugees. The problem I have isnt muslim immigration as much as the rather shoddy execution of taking in the refugees. I am all for a rational approach. Of course, the fearmongering regarding no go zones is utter nonsense, and it is getting tiring debunking this garbage over and over.
Sadly I suspect the growing trend of nationalism will look to eliminate the symptoms rather than the causes. As a result, they can pat themselves on the back while not really solving the underlying problems.
@mandzilla: Long and well thought out post, I am european and while I do think our country takes in too many refugees. The problem I have isnt muslim immigration as much as the rather shoddy execution of taking in the refugees. I am all for a rational approach. Of course, the fearmongering regarding no go zones is utter nonsense, and it is getting tiring debunking this garbage over and over.
Sadly I suspect the growing trend of nationalism will look to eliminate the symptoms rather than the causes. As a result, they can pat themselves on the back while not really solving the underlying problems.
Thank you for taking the time to read it. :) Yeah I can agree that the immigration systems are currently under a lot of pressure in several European countries, and to a certain extent we may have bitten off more than we can chew. The fact that Europe has experienced such high levels of immigration, over a relatively short period of time recently, is clearly not sustainable in the long term. I understand that many Europeans do have legitimate concerns about this, and the impact it can have on their lives.
So yeah, I agree with you that we need to take a rational approach to this issue, and engage with each other in an honest and good intentioned debate regarding immigration, to achieve a solution that works for everyone. Of course we should also continue to protect refugees, and make solving the European migrant crisis a priority. This is itself a separate issue entirely, which is often conflated with traditional immigration. I mean it's the largest movement of refugees Europe has faced since the end of WW2, so I have no illusions that it will be an easy challenge to overcome. Ultimately though, it is really in everyone's interests that we address this humanitarian crisis, as quickly as possible.
And yeah definitely, it does get tiring haha. The right-wing European parties have in many cases achieved electoral success by riding the populist tide of anti-immigrant sentiments. So while fear mongering does nothing to fix the problems, it certainly does help them get more votes. I believe immigration will continue to remain one of the most hotly debated topics in European politics, as it is in America, for the foreseeable future. As a result of this, like you mentioned Nationalism will increasingly appeal to many disillusioned voters, with its promises of short terms solutions to the symptoms, rather than the causes of immigration.
Log in to comment